If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You know I was wondering why can't they do the WBC in november. I went to three rounds of this year the WBC, tokyo, miami and LA and i was asking fans and tried to talk to some WBC officials about the timing. I had more luck with fans then official yet i spoke to a couple people. First of all the idea of doing it in all star game will not work, so matter what jason stark says, most people gave me 4 reasons.

1: If your a club team owner and you have a choice of either having your player get hurt in march or july in games that the club thinks are meaningless you rather in march. If Arod got hurt in july instead of march people would be freaking out.

2: You have to split the rounds play the first rounds in march, then do the later rounds in july. That breaks up team chemistry especially for teams like korea, Japan, netherlands and italy who do not play in the MLB. They have to fly back to their home country not see their teammates for a while then come back and expect to bond immediately.

3: Injuries, more then likely someone will get injured during that time and change the roster. People got mad that USA changed it's roster or adding on player imagine your are completely changing your roster.

Reason number only came from japanese fans and it was that if they do it in ALL STAR weekend japan might not get to see it team because it will probably be done in the USA. Because USA fans will not like to see all star weekend in japan.

Now about november, i first started asking fans and i will split by nationality

Japanese fans: The 2008 japan series was done in november from the 1st to the 9th. The climax series was done just a week before. Problem you are stopping the japanese league during playoffs. That momentum will be gone, you cannot stop for a month then finish the playoffs. Also the japanese season is already short and they do not want to see it shorten.

American fans: there was less concern about it being played in november some thought it was a good idea. A couple people said that people in the world series players should not be eligible and if the red sox are in the world series dice k, pedoria ortiz will not go. I can tell you most of the countries fans will be very angry. Japan is missing a national hero, pedoria probably the best 2nd baseman, ortiz national icon.

Latin american fans: sorry i grouped them in one group but i spoke to a lot of different people. This was split 50/50 pretty much. The concern was winter leagues though most people did not mind their winter leagues being interrupted they felt that many players would not go back to winter leagues and for some fans that is the only chance to see the players up close. Other felt players would be injured by the end of november and want to rest. Again there wasnt a resentment or a major favorable approvable.

Korean fans: the korean series began oct. 26 and ended the 31st again you would be interrupted the playoffs and also players in the series might not be eligible. And will not have practiced with the team. The most surprising note was the Konami Asia series comment one fan told me. He felt that it wasn't fair to suspend or greatly postpone the konami cup. He also felt that some korean players would have played the season, then go to the WBC, and if their teams wins the korean series then they have to play the asia series. Three major tournaments in a 2 month period for korea, and japan. This fan also felt if kbo has it change it's season so should MLB and NPB.

WBC officials: first none of these officials i believe have any real saying power in the WBC but just people who helped organize the tournament in the sense of getting the stadiums ready. Some said they think it might work others said march in the best time. The reason they liked march was because there is no major baseball in march, the weather works so that you can play in north american and japan. It is a great introduction for the pro seasons. Also players do not have to play after a trying season. they also said it was hard to schedule with all major leagues and most owners did like march.

All this information is not official but just questions i asked various people during my WBC trip. I dont know if november is better but after talking and thinking about it a lot march does seem like the only time.

MLB has emphatically promised Miami officials that the WBC will be located there in 2013 if the county agrees to build the Marlins a new ballpark. Now that that's happened, I don't see how the WBC reneges on its promise. Too bad because, as I've written here for months, Miami hates going to baseball games.

MLB has promised the finals, or simply a round of the WBC like this year? I can't see Miami getting the finals as soon as 2013, for the same reason Cuba was kept far, far away from Miami in this year's event.

Otherwise, I agree with most of what you said. I think one change might be that instead of three or four distinct rounds and venues, the 2013 event will have the last two rounds in the same location, in order to cut down on travel and days off. Condensing the 2013 WBC schedule seems to be a high priority from what MLB execs like Selig and Paul Archey have been saying.

Originally Posted by quinnystar27

You know I was wondering why can't they do the WBC in november. ...

A lot of this makes sense but it would be counterproductive for MLB. First of all, they would never want to take the focus away from the World Series by having the WBC immediately follow it. But more importantly, it's a logistical nightmare.

Look at it this way: 26 out of 30 MLB teams are done playing by the first week of October. That means, instead of getting ready 2 weeks early for a March WBC, MLB and minor league players would have to train for SIX weeks (from Oct. 1 end of regular season to mid-Nov. WBC) and then play games into Dec., which essentially adds 7-8 weeks to a player's season instead of the 2 weeks added by a March event. It's just not practical.

MLB has promised the finals, or simply a round of the WBC like this year? I can't see Miami getting the finals as soon as 2013, for the same reason Cuba was kept far, far away from Miami in this year's event.

According to this article, Miami will look to host the finals. And Bob DuPuy (MLB's COO) was on hand making that pitch.

Otherwise, I agree with most of what you said. I think one change might be that instead of three or four distinct rounds and venues, the 2013 event will have the last two rounds in the same location, in order to cut down on travel and days off. Condensing the 2013 WBC schedule seems to be a high priority from what MLB execs like Selig and Paul Archey have been saying.

Do you mean having the finals in the same place as the quarter-final pools? Or only the quarter-final pools in the same place?

I agree that condensing the tournament and avoiding days off is really a good idea.

If any early round games are played in the United States I hope they are played in Spring Training stadiums. A packed 9,000-13,000 seat park looks a lot better than a half full giant MLB stadium. Unless, of course, they wanted to have the U.S. play a few games in Milwaukee (that would be just fine with me ) I wonder what kind of crowd the Japan team would draw at Safeco Field?

A lot of this makes sense but it would be counterproductive for MLB. First of all, they would never want to take the focus away from the World Series by having the WBC immediately follow it. But more importantly, it's a logistical nightmare.

Look at it this way: 26 out of 30 MLB teams are done playing by the first week of October. That means, instead of getting ready 2 weeks early for a March WBC, MLB and minor league players would have to train for SIX weeks (from Oct. 1 end of regular season to mid-Nov. WBC) and then play games into Dec., which essentially adds 7-8 weeks to a player's season instead of the 2 weeks added by a March event. It's just not practical.

I wonder whether the weather has a lot to do with that timing as well. It is not ideal in Spring, but with the WS going deep into October the weather in many parts of USA is suspect, including the traditional Spring venues for ST!! To be quite honest, as a World Championship, Spring is about the only option, unless the whole tournament was played in the Southern Hemisphere which is hardly like at the moment.

No matter how good you are, you're going to lose one-third of your games. No matter how bad you are you're going to win one-third of your games. It's the other third that makes the difference. ~Tommy Lasorda

MLB has emphatically promised Miami officials that the WBC will be located there in 2013 if the county agrees to build the Marlins a new ballpark. Now that that's happened, I don't see how the WBC reneges on its promise. Too bad because, as I've written here for months, Miami hates going to baseball games.

The current Miami ballpark is not exactly in a great location--long way from the city center, not well connected for transport options. And it's a rather hideous structure for hosting baseball. Might the new one be better?

I think it was already said and I agreed with it greatly; quarter-finals, semis, and final game in one location. I think the perfect lcoation would be LA; Angels Stadium and Dodger Stadium both have proven good venues to drawing people. I also think it would be easier for out-of-towners knowing they could plan a trip for one location instead following their team from Miami-LA and San Diego-LA like this year. If not LA because of Miami having a deal because of the new stadium; Miami and Tampa being the only hosts of quarters,semis, and finals would still be good. I just think LA has the diverse culture to support different national teams because of heritage.

I like the idea of play-in because alot of those countries don't have a majority of their team being comprised of MLBers who might not want to leave camp for a qualifier. I would make it the 8 teams who didnt qualify for quarters in the 09 WBC and 8 other teams. However, under my plan Canada/DR would probably be greatly affected by this if they couldn't get their MLBers for a play-in.

Lastly, I think the play-in needs to happen in 2012 because we will need something to replace the importance of what the 2012 Olympic tourney would have provided for international baseball that year.

Wbc 2013

It will be fascinating to see how MLB tweaks the WBC structure to accommodate 24 or more teams in 2013. Hopefully, home games will find their way to deserving nations such as Korea, Dominican, Cuba, Venezuela, etc.

One option that has not been so far considered is a single-elimination tournament. It certainly succeeds for NCAA basketball's March Madness, so why not ?

MLB, MLBPA, the media, and the players are all concerned over excessive off-days, and the length (18 days) of the current double-elimination format, which this year caused Spring Training to open two weeks earlier than normal, and Opening Day to be pushed back a week.

So why not try single-elimination? There certainly would not be any more boring "seeding games" ! And the length of the overall tournament would be reduced from 18 to just eight (8) days.

You could REALLY stimulate global growth of the game, by inviting 64 nations, with 13 of them serving as host cities.

You could have eight sites for two days in the First Round, each reducing their number of teams on the first day from 8 to 4, and on the second day from 4 to 2. There would be four games at each site on the first day, at 9 AM, 1 PM, 5 PM, and 9 PM, and two games at each site on the second day, at 12 Noon (for teams who had played at 9 AM or 1 PM the previous day), and at 7 PM (for teams who had played at 5 PM or 9 PM the previous day). Now there would be 16 nations left for the Second Round. The third and fourth days of the Tournament would be travel days.

You could have four different sites for two days in the Second Round, each reducing their number of teams from 4 to 2 on the first day, and from 2 to one of the second day. Now there would be 4 nations left for the Semi Final Round. The fifth and sixth days of the Tournament would be travel days.

You could have the Semi Final and Final Round over two days, reducing the field to one World Champion. The Semi-Final Round would be played as a day - night doubleheader, on the seventh day of the Tournament. Then the Final Game would be played in the evening of the eighth day of the Tournament.

Eight days, rather than 18 days. Two days off between each round for travel, so that there is plenty of rest for teams traveling long distances. 64 nations rather than just 16.

The great thing about this idea is that there would be thirteen (13) host cities, rather than just seven as in the current format. Deserving cities like Seoul, Korea; Havana, Cuba; Santo Domingo, Dominican; and Caracas, Venezuela could be seriously considered as host cities. The site for the Semi Final and Final Round could be placed permanently at Dodger Stadium, which certainly did a good job of hosting this year's final weekend; or it could be rotated; or it could be hosted by the Defending Champions.

Could 64 Nations Field a WBC Team in 2013

Rally Monkey,

You write that the IBAF only ranks 44 nations, including baseball powerhouses Lesotho and Pakistan. If we all agree we would like to see global development of baseball, and its readmission to the Olympics in 2016, then we have to include countries like Lesotho and Pakistan.

More important than how many nations are ranked by the IBAF, is how many nations' baseball federations are listed in the IBAF Media Guide. That number is 116. Out of these 116 nations with a baseball federation, it would be possible to pick the 64 top nations to invite to the WBC, wouldn't it ?

If any early round games are played in the United States I hope they are played in Spring Training stadiums. A packed 9,000-13,000 seat park looks a lot better than a half full giant MLB stadium. Unless, of course, they wanted to have the U.S. play a few games in Milwaukee (that would be just fine with me ) I wonder what kind of crowd the Japan team would draw at Safeco Field?

or the Metrodome since the Vikings are not getting a new stadium. You could get a big crowd without team USA because if Canada plays many Minnesotans would show up to watch Jusin Monroe or the DR if Liriano is pitching becuase when the NHL did their world cup of hockey the excel sold out to watch Gaborick play for Slovakia against Finland.

More important than how many nations are ranked by the IBAF, is how many nations' baseball federations are listed in the IBAF Media Guide. That number is 116. Out of these 116 nations with a baseball federation, it would be possible to pick the 64 top nations to invite to the WBC, wouldn't it ?

No, Phil. Just because someone has a P.O. Box and is formally recognized by the IBAF doesn't mean they can field a 25-man roster for an international baseball tournament. At least Lesotho and Pakistan have actually competed in IBAF-sanctioned tournaments. That's why they're ranked.

I don't think the cause of internationalizing baseball would be much advanced by having Venezuela rule run Tunisia by 72 runs in 5 innings. It would be embarrassing.

Having said that, after a generation or so there will surely be more parity in international play. A full 64-team single-elimination tournament may be the right way to go then. For now, though, I vote no.

I don't think the cause of internationalizing baseball would be much advanced by having Venezuela rule run Tunisia by 72 runs in 5 innings. It would be embarrassing.

Having said that, after a generation or so there will surely be more parity in international play. A full 64-team single-elimination tournament may be the right way to go then. For now, though, I vote no.

I agree. A 32-team might work out. In addition to the 16 who played in 2009, you could add:

No, Phil. Just because someone has a P.O. Box and is formally recognized by the IBAF doesn't mean they can field a 25-man roster for an international baseball tournament. At least Lesotho and Pakistan have actually competed in IBAF-sanctioned tournaments. That's why they're ranked.

I don't think the cause of internationalizing baseball would be much advanced by having Venezuela rule run Tunisia by 72 runs in 5 innings. It would be embarrassing.

Having said that, after a generation or so there will surely be more parity in international play. A full 64-team single-elimination tournament may be the right way to go then. For now, though, I vote no.

And I don't think some the IBAF members even have a proper P.O. Box......

Lesotho and Pakistan may have competed in IBAF sanctioned tournaments, but I distinctly recall some teams even withdrawing from IBAF sanctioned tournaments, including the Bahamas who are ranked (rather they just didn't show up for the 2003 qualification tournament in Panama and couldn't be contacted). In fact it seems like the Caribbean is prone to withdrawals - I think Aruba withdrew from the 2007 qualification tournament after it had progressed and about 2 or 3 teams had withdrawn without playing a game.

A 64-team single elimination tournament would have over half of the IBAF members, which would be kind of unfair on the other half. I also don't see how interest would be generated in the participating countries where baseball isn't popular if their teams only play one or two games and are then out (which they surely would be once they faced more meaningful opposition), especially since these games would not even be played at home. Parity may be achieved in a generation, but only if the sport is cultivated in those countries - many generations have passed since the first baseball world cup and baseball is still low on the radar in places like Tunisia and Britain (in fact one could say it has regressed in Britain).

i would love to see a single elimination tournament but i do not think we are ready for that yet. I think 24 nations for 2013 is just right lets not get to 32 just yet. I think after 2013 baseball will be back in the olympics and then emerging powers like china will get stronger and new baseball traditions will emerge. Now the nations that should be added in my opinion and this is open to debate are; Czech Republic, Germany, Spain, Nicaragua, Colombia,Russia, Great Britain, Brazil. I like brazil because of the mix of japanese brazilian players could add a strong team. Great Britain because i spent times in that league once and it has really developed and has a nice team coming up but a i think a lot depends on its world cup showing this november. Colombia can benefit from some major leaguers. Czech republic has got so 90 mph pitchers. Germany good batting, spain a mix of nationalities will add experience and maybe some good bats. Nicaragua i think will have a strong group of players. And russia has a good baseball history with victor starffin but i do not know much about this time but i hear they can play baseball. I like ghana and nigeria a lot but i do no think they are ready.

Colombia and Nicaragua should both be included just because they actually are baseball countries that have produced MLB players. Brazil is a must because it is a nascent baseball country with a burgeoning baseball program with one hundred and eighty million citizens. MLB also needs a greater presence in South America. Germany, Spain and the Czech Republic are also nascent baseball countries that should be included to increase MLB presence in Europe especially considering the Olympics. How about the Phillipines?

Why are we hot for a single-elimination tournament? Even with 32 countries, that's even fewer games than we just had, and half of them would play only once!

I want to see more countries added and more games!

I want to see the same, but I do not think the tournament is ready for that. If we had 32 teams i do not think like 7 of those 32 cant keep up with the netherlands so it would be a bit of a joke. After 2013 add more teams. I believe this because MLB right now is in the process of opening up 2 or 3 more europe academies, Rob Nyer of ESPN stated that MLB is trying to open up a branches in asia and possible a new MLB division in asia. So we can see other asian countries develop to the level were they can compete against Japan. You look at china that really started their baseball program not to long ago, but after MLB poured money into them they became a emerging power. But it took about 5-10 years. So I do not see teams yet that can be added to the 24 to make 32 that will be competitive. Remember one of the WBC selection of the originals nations were developed baseball programs who had a heavy influence on scouting. The sent scouts or looked at scouting information and asked can this country play against the best of the world, if scouts find players who have MLB tools in another countries great but if they dont i do not think we should have 32 teams for 2013. Remember 2009 WBC had some problems and they are still figuring it out do not do too much to fast.

I want to see the same, but I do not think the tournament is ready for that. If we had 32 teams i do not think like 7 of those 32 cant keep up with the netherlands so it would be a bit of a joke. After 2013 add more teams. I believe this because MLB right now is in the process of opening up 2 or 3 more europe academies, Rob Nyer of ESPN stated that MLB is trying to open up a branches in asia and possible a new MLB division in asia. So we can see other asian countries develop to the level were they can compete against Japan. You look at china that really started their baseball program not to long ago, but after MLB poured money into them they became a emerging power. But it took about 5-10 years. So I do not see teams yet that can be added to the 24 to make 32 that will be competitive. Remember one of the WBC selection of the originals nations were developed baseball programs who had a heavy influence on scouting. The sent scouts or looked at scouting information and asked can this country play against the best of the world, if scouts find players who have MLB tools in another countries great but if they dont i do not think we should have 32 teams for 2013. Remember 2009 WBC had some problems and they are still figuring it out do not do too much to fast.

I agree with all of this. Single-elimination would work for me if it comes after a round or two of pool play. Like the soccer world cup. Otherwise, too few match-ups.

One question: Do you have a link to the Rob Neyer comments? I missed those.

I'd quite like it to be organised like the Football World Cup providing they could stretch it to 32-teams without creating too much of an environment where minnow bashing was commonplace. At the moment it would be a bit of a stretch I think

8 Groups of 4 Teams- Top 2 Go Through, followed by straight knockout all the way to the final

For whatever reason the single-elimination game doesn't seem to be all that popular in the USA, but the point of the WBC seems to be spreading international baseball around the globe so I'd rather put that in instead of two rounds of double-elimination

You look at china that really started their baseball program not to long ago, but after MLB poured money into them they became a emerging power.

MLB built a baseball power in China?

Originally Posted by Sweet_Bokke

For whatever reason the single-elimination game doesn't seem to be all that popular in the USA, but the point of the WBC seems to be spreading international baseball around the globe so I'd rather put that in instead of two rounds of double-elimination

USAmericans love a knockout tournament. It's baseball that doesn't fit the knockout well. MLB teams now use five starting pitchers in rotation, colleges three, and small boys two. Only the kiddies in some locales routinely rotate multiple pitchers thru the game. Knockout baseball is too much of which pitcher has the best stuff and endurance today.

For whatever reason the single-elimination game doesn't seem to be all that popular in the USA, but the point of the WBC seems to be spreading international baseball around the globe so I'd rather put that in instead of two rounds of double-elimination

Not so. One of the most popular sports tournment in the USA--the college and university basketball tournament--is single-elimination with a field of 64 teams. People in the States love that format.

And the professional American football playoff tournament is single-elimination too. And it's the most popular sportig event in the country.

......the eight legit baseball countries that aren't already in the Classic are Germany, Czech Republic, Spain, Philippines, Thailand, Brazil, Colombia, and especially Nicaragua. Those countries compete in international competitions already, they're all in the top 25 of the IBAF World Rankings (with the exception of Thailand, which is 26), and (again with the exception of Thailand) they each have a pretty well-developed club league. I'm sure we can quibble with some of these at the margins, but it's pretty clear. After the top-25, it all falls off pretty dramatically.

Plus, these countries are pretty widely dispersed. Not too many Euro countries, not too many American. What's not to like?

And with Colombia and Nicaragua at least they could have teams augmented by MLB players. I think there would be two eligible Nicaraguans from the MLB and maybe a handful (four or five) eligible Colombians. I would expect the Philippines and Thailand to easily be the weakest teams of the tournament if they were picked for 2013 though and unless there is massive improvement between now and 2013 I wouldn't expect to see them pass the the preliminary round.....

I e-mailed Dr. Schiller on the IBAF site asking which countries may be added by 2013? He responded by not knowing yet which countries will be added, but said that discussions are the following: at least three from Latin America, possibly three from Europe, one from Asia and one from Africa.

USAmericans love a knockout tournament. It's baseball that doesn't fit the knockout well. MLB teams now use five starting pitchers in rotation, colleges three, and small boys two. Only the kiddies in some locales routinely rotate multiple pitchers thru the game. Knockout baseball is too much of which pitcher has the best stuff and endurance today.

Sorry I should have made it a bit clearer- I was talking about baseball specifically, which as you mention does have the issue of a 'pitching rotation' which doesn't make it ideal for knockout baseball

However, I do feel that having knockout baseball after the initial group stage of the WBC is a good idea that adds a further degree of strategy and team management to the mix- which starting pitcher will the manager go with for the first knockout game, then any potential games after that?

I'm not worried about pitchers missing out on playing past the first knockout if their team gets eliminated- they are big boys after all and will get over it in time